Fixer-upper: Soon, you can't sell it 'til you fix it
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
posted by Bob at Thursday, October 30, 2008
Custom Search
Thursday, October 30, 2008
A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL HOME
Do you have a topic you want to discuss at the Town Hall? Email your request to A_Democracy@yahoo.com
“A DEMOCRACY” Disclaimer- While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to this forum express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned
THE ROOF GUYS
Mickey's Diner 1950 7th Street West, St Paul, MN
(651) 698-8387
AX-MAN SURPLUS
1639 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
Tel:(651)646-8653
LANDLORD.COM LINK HERE
SHHHH! While we listen to words of wisdom from a wise man.
Conscience is the light of the Soul that burns within the chambers of our psychological heart. It is as real as life is. It raises the voice in protest whenever anything is thought of or done contrary to the righteousness. Conscience is a form of truth that has been transferred through our genetic stock in the form of the knowledge of our own acts and feelings as right or wrong. A virtuous and courageous person can alone use the instrument of conscience. He or she can alone hear the inner voice of the soul clearly. In a wicked person this faculty is absent. The sensitive nature of his / her conscience has been destroyed by sin or corruption. Hence he or she is unable to discriminate right from wrong. Those who are leading organizations, business enterprises, institutions and governments should develop this virtue of the ability to use their own conscience. This wisdom of using the clean conscience will enable them to enjoy the freedom.
Dr APJ Kalam, President of India given during the inauguration of the seminar on “THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Previous Posts
- Slumlords and their crime generating properties ha...
- Local Republicans targeted
- McCollum condemns racist political flier
- St. Paul business might get the boot, but not with...
- Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
- Owner of St. Paul duplex raided before RNC plans t...
- Saint Paul/ Federal Fair Housing Lawsuits, Meet Vi...
- Saint Paul/ Federal Fair Housing Lawsuits part 12,...
- Saint Paul/ Federal Fair Housing Lawsuits, Meet Vi...
- Nancy C. Lazaryan, el al., v. City of St. Paul, et...
16 Comments:
Cities' measures requiring house owners to make repairs before they can sell have real estate agents wary the codes will keep vacant homes vacant.
By JENNA ROSS, Star Tribune
Last update: October 27, 2008 - 6:51 AM
DOES YOUR CITY HAVE A POINT-OF-SALE INSPECTION?
Read summaries of cities' inspection programs -- some of which require repairs, some of which don't -- at www.mplsrealtor.com/public_tos.aspx.
Brooklyn Park now requires houses to be inspected and brought up to code before they can be sold. This summer, St. Paul began requiring the same for vacant homes in rough shape. Robbinsdale and Coon Rapids are discussing similar programs.
The cities are trying to maintain quality housing stock in the midst of a couple scenarios: People buying cheap houses without understanding that they might need $80,000 in repairs. Or investors buying vacant houses only to flip them without doing necessary fixes.
A policy that requires repairs when homes are sold -- often called a "point-of-sale" ordinance -- saves neighborhoods, they say.
"We want to make sure that when a house comes back online that it's serviceable," said St. Paul City Council Member Dan Bostrom, whose city passed its policy in June.
But real estate agents have resisted. They say the extra step bogs down an already complicated process, interferes with owners' rights and burdens sellers. In short, it keeps vacant homes vacant.
"It's frustrating to no end," said Frank D'Angelo, broker and owner of Blaine-based EXIT Realty Executives. "As much as they had great intentions, it's really jeopardizing the housing stock."
D'Angelo understands and supports "truth-in-housing" programs, such as Minneapolis', which require an inspection for the sake of disclosure, but don't require fixes. But he called city-run inspection programs "a way to generate funds" for now-quiet building departments.
Cities' programs differ, sometimes dramatically. Brooklyn Park requires repairs for all homes, while St. Paul requires them for only certain classifications of vacant houses. Hopkins allows independent evaluators to do the work, while Brooklyn Park requires the inspections be done by city staff. The cost of an inspection also varies, from about $50 to $200.
Many cities allow buyers and sellers to set up an escrow for the repairs. All cities say they focus inspections on "hazardous" conditions, not cosmetic issues.
"We're not looking at carpet and paint," said Jim Hilgendorf, a building official with Brooklyn Park. "It's plumbing systems, electrical systems, roofs -- sticks-and-stones kinds of stuff."
Some cities have required such inspections and subsequent fixes for years. Osseo, for example, began its program in 2000, because of its aging housing stock, said city planner Jeffrey Dahl. Bloomington and St. Louis Park have long-standing programs as well.
But more cities have explored the idea recently because of the surge in vacant and foreclosed properties. Robbinsdale has discussed point-of-sale inspections "on and off" for years, said City Manager Marcia Glick, but might be more likely to pass such a measure now as a way to make banks responsible for repairs. The City Council will discuss the issue at a work session this week.
"Certainly we have pretty strong rental licensing requirements..." she said. "But if somebody buys a house and a family moves in, there's nothing requiring repairs to happen at that transaction. Is that something the city should get involved in or not?"
Plymouth, at this point, says no. The city is gathering information about such an ordinance, but "it's probably not the right time," said Steve Juetten, community development director.
"Doing it will require some additional expenditures -- either on the part of the homeowners or the buyer," he said. "That's not something we want to add onto the equation, given the current housing market."
Officials in Columbia Heights expected an inspection and repair ordinance to pass this summer, but when the issue had a public hearing in July, more than two dozen residents spoke against it. The City Council dropped the proposal.
Local realtors associations count that as a victory.
At least two have drawn up position statements against time-of-sale inspection ordinances. The North Metro Realtors Association approved its statement last week. It states that although the group "has an interest in maintaining high-quality housing stock," cities should drop broad ordinances and target "problem properties" instead.
"In some cases, cities are actually hurting their housing," said Bob Day, a Realtor and president of the North Metro Realtors Association. "A lot of people want to buy a fixer-upper ... If the city says the seller has to put in a new furnace but they have no money for one, they're going to put in the cheapest furnace they can. Maybe the buyer wanted to put in a high-efficiency furnace."
Since passing its ordinance last fall, Brooklyn Park has conducted 2,200 inspections, and nearly all houses have required at least some small repairs, Hilgendorf said. The city has modified its requirements so homeowners and buyers can establish an escrow for those repairs, although city staff isn't sure that's working.
City workers have caught dangerous situations, such as vents that have been cross-wired and electronic panels without cover plates. And they've gotten banks to take responsibility for properties they're selling, they said.
"We might have delayed some sales, but ultimately, when people buy a home in Brooklyn Park, they can feel comfortable signing the papers," said Gary Brown, city engineer and director of engineering and building inspections.
St. Paul passed its requirements after working with real estate agents to craft a measure satisfactory to both sides. Council Member Bostrom considers it an important step in restoring neighborhoods dotted with foreclosures.
"I'd like to feel bad for the banks, and I'd like to feel bad for the Realtors," he said, "but, really, I feel bad for the people who still live in those neighborhoods. They're the ones living in a tough situation."
Jenna Ross • 612-673-7168
When did these poor people start living in such poor conditions Chuk? The reason I mentyion your name is because you seem to be the expert on everything that moves in the city. As long as I have lived in the city there's been fier uppers in the neighborhoods. They were bought and fixed up using local labor most of the time and that money was respent in the neighborhood and people made money while fixing up the housing stock at the same time. The city's scheme to target people for forced sale of the property and the resulting moving of the poor out of the neighborhoods had an unintended consequence. Abandonment and vacant buidlings. Now the city tries to BS their way out of the problem by making sure nothing gets fixed up? The banks are not going to do and many of the people living in them are not going to do it, so the palce gets torns down and the people who are living in such poor conditions are now additionaly burdened with hgiher property taxes. How does this make any sense? It doesn't.
9:23 - that isn't what happened. What happened is that we had a large number of people that watched infomercials about how easy it was to become a millionaire by buying cheep property and then were surprised that they couldn't keep them up or flip them. The ammount of simple standard houses that went rental and then went vacant in the last ten years was staggering. The bulk of them on foreclosures, few if any do to condemnation.
So, the council past an ordinance that says if you have let the house go vacant and then go to hell, you can't sell it unless you have brought it back to code.
So, don't let your property go vacant and you can still sell it as a fixer upper.
There are thousands of empty properties that aren't "vacant."
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
And the people watching those infomercials bought the property from landlords who were targeted and forced out by the city. St Paul's got dirty hands here Chuck.
Economic torts protect citizens in their buisness and trade.
Nothing wrong with selling a fixer uper because the law of torts protects your right to do so.
I have seen case law that suggests that a unit of government that intereferes with this right can be prevented from requiring house owners make the repairs.
I believe that all a house owner has to do is properly disclose things about the home that need fixing (a disclosure ).
Why should the city interefere with this.
If the buyer agrees to make the repairs noted on the disclosure, let the guy buy it.
The city need not stick its nose in it.
Whats in it for them ?
Jeff Matiatos
Yeah well you might be right Jeff, but consider this.....in a city where they have already shown they have no respect for anyone rights or the rule of law, all they have to do is say to the buyer that he violated their ordiance adn they are not going to issue a buiilding permit. That stops the whole show right there, and the city would get away with it because they know that most people don't have the money to fight them. So while you may be right, the city will enforce another illegal law with impunity and if someone should try and sue.....well them they just use the taxpayers money to run the guy around the block for 60 years till he runs out of money or dies.
If st.paul is considering to implement new ordinances of this type, they better check the law on trade and buisness torts.
Would their have to be a public hearing on this issue ?
Jeff Matiatos
So what you could do is sell the property on a contract for deed under the terms you specify, like under the terms of the contract, the buyer agrees to make the repairs consistant with the disclosure the buyer signed.
Leaving the city out of the contract means the city would have to have the contract revolked by the court as an unlawful contract because it doesn't comply with the ordinance.
I see conflicts in the law on contracts and the ability of the city to interefere with contract law that is already in place that were approved by the legislature.
Seems a legislative amendment by our STATE legislature might be needed, though if other citys have done this, maybe not.
I am sure real estate agents would
be more than happy to appear before the city council in opposition to any proposal by the city that ordinances like this are passed.
They, as well as contract attorneys
should advise the council.
Jeff Matiatos
Jeff those hearings already occurred and the Realtor's testified against the ordinance.
The real issue on this of course is that the City isn't the level of government where title is transferred. So, I think there is going to still be some issue about how exactly the City tells the County that property X can't be transferred because of the ordinance.
It is amazing what people think are their rights to property. And, how they so easily dismiss the public's interest on what happens on someone's land.
You are not the King/Queen of your land. You never have been. You are not sovereign. We the people are sovereign and maintain an interest in the health, welfare and protection of all of our lands. You do not have the right to turn your land into a toxic waste dump. You never did. We the people (the state) when we gave the first land patent for the land gave it to the first title holder clean and pristine. We the people (the government) have always maintained an interest in the title of the land.
THERE IS NO OTHER WAY FOR A COUNTRY TO EXIST! You are not your own country. Whether you like it or not you are a part of this one and the government when it gives you a deed to property only gives you so many rights to its use.
It is like the Supreme Court ruling on Keto. The court basically said if you don't like what the cities or states are doing about property rights change the laws about them, but the basic way that any country is defined is its land and the land is first and foremost the country's. You will never take away the power of the sovereign to control his land and we the people are sovereign.
Eminent Domain = Eminence Dominion = The King's Land...
In this county we the people are King and it is our land.
The Founding Father's greatest concern were those with vast wealth who would want to be the princes of their lands. This land is, was and always will be ruled by we the people.
...and Jeff land will never be a "trade" issue...
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
While codes are supposedly written in stone, interpretation is not. This leaves the city with a completely arbitrary process that is not enforced fairly.
Chuck, it was with the indians.
Jef Matiatos
Chuck, the U.S. Government traded for the indians land like we traded arms for hostages.
Jeff Matiatos
Jeff the Indian tribes were sovereign countries. Just like England, Spain, France, Mexico and Russia that we either bought the land from or took it from in battle.
Sovereign.
Countries.
Not someone with a government deed, which is all you or I ever have.
Get it?
You and the other land lords are not sovereign countries.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Chuck, the indians were not a sovereign nation in a governmental capacity.
There were many different tribes that owned thousands of acres of land.
The indians were here before long before this government established
and named the territories.
A great deal of this country was also stolen from mexico.
You can't even accept the truth about history of this huge land mass we call America.
Jeff Matiatos
but the basic way that any country is defined is its land and the land is first and foremost the country's.
Chuck, your take on this is myopic to the point of toxic.
Our constitution carefully *separates* the rights and powers of government and individual - with the aim of LIMITING GOVERNMENT POWER. You seem unwilling to recognize those limits (at least when the DFL is in power).
"Life, Liberty and the Preservation of Private Property" was goal of small-l "liberal" society set down by John Locke (Jefferson changed it to "pursuit of happiness", but only because he understood, as did all the founding fathers, that the sanctity of private property was key to the "happiness" of the citizen in a society composed of a "free association of equals", as opposed to the mass of lumpen serfs whose rights and property exist only at the sufferance of government...
...which is what you seem to believe society is and should be.
With all due respect, Chuck, I've seen you write nothing that would show you as uncomfortable living in North Korea, as far as the rights of the (non-connected) individual are concerned. Your idea that private property is subordinate to the sovereignty of the government is...words fail.
12:40 - why then would the 5th amendment be written into the constitution assuring just compensation when the government took private property?
Clearly the founding fathers assumed that the government "took" private property. As Washington's Army moved up and down the country side the Army "took" private property on a regular basis and gave the owners invoices to bill congress for what they took.
Your attitude about the rights of private property doesn't come from Washington, Adams, Hamilton or Jefferson it comes from Adam Smith a hundred years later when capitalism had run totally amok and the beginning of the belief that the people represented by the government were the enemy to free enterprise.
History just doesn't back your beliefs.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Post a Comment
<< Home